User comment history
< Newer [ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 ] Older >
| News Comments > UT3 "Titan Pack" Plans |
 |
| 46. |
Re: UT3 |
Jan 28, 2009, 18:57 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
Well, unfortunately Add/Remove Programs only lists games downloaded since my current install (not that I would even use that method to uninstall games). However, Steam auto-detects whether a game has been run before as the DirectX / Visual Basic / Gamespy Comrade / GfWL installers popup on first run after a format, though you can simply click cancel and skip them (helpful when most games ask you to install DirectX). I don't know how it works, just that it does. I guess that would have been too much to hope for. I wonder if verifying the integrity of the game cache for those games would "reinstall" them. I know that function has fixed registry entries for me before. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > UT3 "Titan Pack" Plans |
|
| 44. |
Re: UT3 |
Jan 28, 2009, 06:44 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
You don't have to fuck with the disc with the retail version either. It has good old-fashioned DRM which means full unrestricted single-player and LAN mode and only a CD key required for online play.
But you still need to install it every time you reinstall Windows, which is what I hate (I even hate the initial install). Steam you just download it once and then keep it on a separate drive - every time you format you simply install the Steam client to the other drive and all your games are up and running quicker than you can install a single game. That may not seem like much but I have 120 games on Steam - like fuck would I install them all after every format. Steam is a HUGE advantage to me and I play games much more often because of it. How does this work exactly? I've noticed that when I install a game through Steam, it actually does a "normal Windows install" in the background. Games get registry entries and entries in Add/Remove Programs (Programs and Features in Vista and presumably Windows 7). Does your method do the same thing? You can check by seeing if the games you installed that way (pointing to the drive where they were installed as opposed to manually installing them through Steam) show up in the Add/Remove list. If so, Steam is even more useful than I thought.
I'm a big fan of Steam myself, but I really wish they would get a team to improve the UI. Why can't I organize my games into groups? That must be especially annoying to you with over 120 games on Steam. I have "only" 91 (of which I usually only have 20 or 30 installed at any given time) and it drives me crazy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Fallout 3: Operation Anchorage |
|
| 16. |
Re: Fallout 3: Operation Anchorage |
Jan 27, 2009, 13:47 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
Bethesda gave us Star Trek Legacy. To be fair, I think Mad Doc (the developers) was more responsible for Legacy's shortcomings than Bethesda was. Look at their track record, and you'll see a history of problems. Among other things, they were responsible for Empire Earth 3 and the PC port of Bully. They have produced questionable results at more than one publisher... what does that tell you?
This comment was edited on Jan 27, 2009, 13:50. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > F.E.A.R. of Brand Dilution |
|
| 64. |
Re: F.E.A.R. Brand Dilution |
Dec 31, 2008, 14:42 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
I for one bought The Orange Box for Episode 2. I liked Episode 1 (although not as much as HL2 itself), and I would have bought Episode 2 however it was packaged. The price tag for TOB gave me pause until I looked at some previews for Portal and got excited for it as well. TF2 didn't interest me because I'm not a multiplayer gamer. 2 games for that price seemed like a good deal, so I didn't hesitate to buy it. If I hadn't cared about Portal, I think I would have bought TOB anyway rather than wait to buy Episode 2 individually - I couldn't take any more waiting!
This comment was edited on Dec 31, 2008, 14:44. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Baldur's Gate Retrospective |
|
| 12. |
Re: Baldur's Gate Retrospective |
Dec 24, 2008, 07:29 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
I agree. It'd be nice to have BG1,2, IWD 1,2 and Planescape all made available. I only hope they update everything so it runs on XP. I remember the day I bought BG1 and fired it up. It took me back to my days of gaming with 1E D&D. I've played them all on XP without any problems.
I played all of the Infinity engine games, but I never got into the IWD series (in fact, I never finished the second one due to the extreme difficulty in the endgame). I prefer a good story to nearly endless combat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > X3: Terran Conflict Patch |
|
| 14. |
Re: X3: Terran Conflict Patch |
Dec 24, 2008, 07:20 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
That was fortunately fixed in 1.3. Patrols no longer lead to 3 screens full of "Xenon P" or 37 Xenon K. Yeah, I know. Unfortunately, I need to get through this old-style patrol first (which I started on 1.2.1), so I can start playing the "new and improved" patrols. I destroyed too many ships and have tallied up too much of a reward to abort the mission, so I'm going to burn my way through this one if it kills me. I foolishly jumped only a M6 into the system, so the fighters are the hard part. Once I can get rid of all the fighters, killing the P's and K's will be a breeze. If I had brought a fighter in, I could have taken out the fighters fairly easily, then jumped in my M6 to take down the capships. But the system is so full of enemies now I'm afraid I won't be able to jump any other ships in without losing them (I tried bringing in my M7, but it was quickly destroyed with the AI in control of it*). Oh well, live and learn.
* It would probably help if I had it equipped with better anti-fighter weaponry than a bunch of PACs. I just bought a bunch of FLAKs to try them out, so maybe I can try bringing it in again. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > X3: Terran Conflict Patch |
|
| 8. |
Re: X3: Terran Conflict Patch |
Dec 23, 2008, 20:12 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
Egosoft must be in the Christmas spirit. 1.4 was just released on Steam. :p Sweet. Delays of one day are nothing to complain about.
I'm trying to get back into the game. I played it a lot when it first came out, but then I got distracted by Fallout 3 and GTA4 (which actually runs alright on my system). I was in the middle of a massive Xenon patrol, which got a little hectic due to the number of enemy ships. I've been playing for a few minutes, picking off a few ships at a time, but I am finding that I don't have the patience to finish the whole patrol in one sitting. Hopefully I can finish it before 1.5 comes out.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Sunday Q&A Roundup |
|
| 5. |
Re: Sunday Q&A Roundup |
Dec 22, 2008, 15:20 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
Actually, the AI got a big overhaul for SoZ, because the biggest AI mod for the game was incorporated into the expansion. I'm sure it isn't completely flawless though - there's always room for improvement. Anyway, I didn't notice major AI problems in SoZ.
The UI hasn't been changed much. It never bothered me for the original release, so I enjoyed the original and both expansions quite a bit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > S.T.A.L.K.E.R. C.h.e.a.p. |
|
| 41. |
Re: S.T.A.L.K.E.R. C.h.e.a.p. |
Dec 21, 2008, 02:01 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
Strangely enough, that mod seems to work just fine with SoC. I didn't notice that it was for Clear Sky, so I downloaded it and tried it out. I noticed a definite improvement in textures.
I'm guessing Clear Sky shares a lot of textures with SoC, so the mod works either way. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Fallout 3 DLC Interview |
|
| 13. |
Re: Fallout 3 DLC Interview |
Dec 17, 2008, 11:35 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
That is DEFINITELY one thing they've improved from FO/FO2. Is there a single trap in FO/FO2 that does more than 10 damage? I found a safe with dynamite strapped to it. BOOOOOOOOM. You take 10 damage. Wow, that was impressive. I never got damaged much from traps in FO3, but maybe that's because my demolitions skill was decent. I occasionally took damage from a mine or grenade cluster, but they're very easy to avoid even if you don't have demo skill. I found tons of combat shotgun traps, but I never triggered any of them. Do those traps actually do anything (presumably they shoot you), and if so, what makes them go off? That was one of those unanswered questions I had at the end of the game. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Gaming Versus Antivirus Software |
|
| 5. |
Re: Gaming Versus Antivirus Software |
Dec 12, 2008, 14:48 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
If turning off AV during gaming is stupid, I wonder what you think of those few of us who don't run AV at all.
I know that AV software has made strides in reducing the performance drop while active, but I'm still never going to run it on my gaming computer. Smart browsing is infinitely more effective than AV alone, in my opinion.
I'm not so sure gaming-related services are good targets for virus writers, either. The business world is far more enticing. Besides, spam/adware greatly outnumbers "traditional" viruses these days, and that trend will probably continue for the foreseeable future. Spam/adware can be completely avoided by smart browsing/email usage.
This comment was edited on Dec 12, 2008, 14:49. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Game Reviews |
|
| 6. |
Re: Grand Theft Auto 4... |
Dec 8, 2008, 12:32 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
So...is anybody playing GTA 4 multiplayer, not having problems, and is actually enjoying it?
I haven't tried multiplayer yet, but I intend to once I finish the story. Background programs and DRM don't bother me much (they're annoying, but I'm not going to boycott a game because of them and deprive myself of a fun game), so keep that in mind. Anyway, I'm really enjoying the singleplayer game. Combat is improved quite a bit from previous games in the series, although the driving seems a bit worse. All of the trademarks of the GTA series are there: the sarcastic humor, larger-than-life characters, cinematic missions, sandbox-style gameplay, and so on. It's a shame that the game suffers from performance issues and graphical glitches (textures disappear and reappear sometimes when I'm playing), but I wouldn't call it a crippling blow. With a little tweaking, the game is very playable, and patching should only improve things.
I always take complaints here (and at other sites) with a grain of salt. With each new year, bitter, bitchy gamers seem to double in size. PC gamers are the worst of the bunch, for whatever reason. I choose to be an optimist. Sometimes I get depressed by buggy games or the decreasing number of PC games, but I try to stay positive. Why game if it makes you so miserable? Some of the complaints are valid, but as usual the noise is a lot higher than the validity of the complaining warrants.
As for whether you should buy the game or not, it really depends on what you're willing to deal with. If you don't mind dealing with third-party programs (both of them are pretty much invisible once you sign up*) and tweaking the game to get it to a playable framerate, the game is a lot of fun.
* Social Club is part of the launcher and also runs in the tray, and the game will automatically sign you in to Live during the intro movies, so they're pretty unobtrusive.
This comment was edited on Dec 8, 2008, 12:36. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Game Reviews |
|
| 2. |
Re: Game Reviews |
Dec 8, 2008, 10:42 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
That phrase is a little unclear– is it still necessary to sign up for and install Social Club if you don't play MP? If I ever pick up the PC version it'll be for SP only, so NOT having to use SC would be welcome. But then it sounds like it might be necessary for the online check, even if you're not using MP. Surprised Can someone clarify that? On the Steam version, from what I remember Social Club gets installed automatically. In fact, I'm not even sure it's an install; I think it may just be an executable that runs from the GTA install folder.
Anyway, I'm not sure if it's possible to play the game without signing up for Social Club, but I know you can play without signing in to it. In case you didn't know, Social Club is a tray utility that runs when Windows loads (be default). If it's not already running, GTA will launch it when it loads - it's basically the launcher for GTA.
Once you're in the game, Games for Windows Life loads, but it is apparently possible to play without signing in to that service either. I wouldn't know; I already had a GFWL account from playing Fallout 3, so GTA4 signed me in automatically. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Game Reviews |
|
| 12. |
Re: Game Reviews |
Dec 5, 2008, 14:16 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
Despite the performance issues the game is a huge amount of fun and has great gameplay. Agreed. Although I haven't done much combat yet, I really like the shooting (and cover) system so far - it seems a lot better than in previous GTAs.
Yesterday I was doing a mission that involved chasing someone down along several rooftops, and I didn't stop in time. I had to do the mission over again, but my blunder had me in stitches. For some reason, falling deaths have always amused me, whether it's this or force pushing enemies off ledges in Jedi Knight 2/3. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Newell: Most DRM "Dumb" |
|
| 51. |
Re: Newell: Most DRM Dumb |
Dec 5, 2008, 14:03 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
Why does Steam not show up on add/remove programs? That is pretty dicey. It should be there... if it's not, you probably ran into problems during install.
In fact, third-party games on Steam usually show up in Add/Remove programs too, in my experience.
Also, is there a way to just shut it off (for months) but leave it there in case you want to use it again one day? You can set it to not start with Windows, so yes. If you don't use it for months though, it will have to update when you run it again, and I wouldn't be surprised if it forgets your saved login (if you choose to auto-login). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > GTA4 PC Problems |
|
| 114. |
Re: GTA4 PC Problems |
Dec 5, 2008, 09:21 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
| I'm not sure how much of a resource hog GFWL is, but I really don't think it has any impact on GTA4's poor performance. Fallout 3 and Kane & Lynch both have GFWL, and their performance is fine (although Fallout 3 has performance issues for some people, it doesn't appear to be GFWL related). I know it's popular to bash Microsoft, but I don't think they are directly to blame in this case. Even blaming Microsoft for GTA4 lacking standard gamepad support is somewhat misplaced; it's not like Windows games required standard gamepad support in the past - it was up to the devs then, and it's up to the devs now (GFW isn't preventing devs from including standard gamepad support). Honestly, if GFW didn't exist, I wouldn't be at all surprised to still see most games only supporting the Xbox gamepad. If devs don't want to make a really good port, they don't need lax certification standards to justify a lackluster effort. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > GTA4 PC Problems |
|
| 30. |
Re: GTA4 PC Problems |
Dec 4, 2008, 12:07 |
Ecthelion |
|
|
Also the required GFWL crap when it comes to saving games. No internet? No saved games! Im going to a LAN party in 1 week and I will not be able to play it/show it off during lunch/dinner breaks. A recent GFWL update said something about tracking achievements when offline, so it's possible that you can use GFWL offline, if you login prior to that (similar to how Steam works). This is just a guess, but it seems likely due to the update notes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
1339 Comments. 67 pages. Viewing page 23.
< Newer [ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
